*1 Rehearing Denied Nov. 1966. Judge, WORLEY, Chief Before ALMOND, MARTIN, RICH, SMITH
Judges. Judge.
RICH, appeal unanimous de- is from the This Ap- Board of cision of the Patent Office reconsideration, upon peals,1 adhered ap- rejection affirming examiner’s 1, 3, paratus and arti- and 11-18 claims remaining ap- 9, all claims cle claim August 48,668, plication No. filed serial 10, 1960, “Apparatus for and Meth- Closing Filling Opening, od of Bags.” appeal Thermoplastic 9. been as to claim withdrawn pack- aging within flexible articles jet upper- supplying a of air to the open it a stack of most permit the insertion of the article. rectangular opening at one end. have an One of provided extension, or walls is with an flap, projects beyond the mouth and which contains a of trans- versely aligned holes. ex- Perforations tending from hole to it so it can be torn weaken stacked, retaining pins. The down, placed on with their supported state horizontal spring-biased hinge. at one depressed when loaded with hinge. pivoting Upon release, on its spring urges support upwardly to- upper having pins ward an depending pass therefrom which bag flaps the holes in and into ings provided support plate. in the lower Only flap of each underlies member, upper plate functions upward unlimited move- which, ment of stack of Consisting Brewrink, 1. Freehof, writing Examiners-in-Chief Manian latter opinion. *2 1018 conjunction support, permit pin passage there-
in with the lower the of said flaps through, whereby bag flaps clamp or are simul- sandwich the acts through taneously bags, pins passing clamped the the the both the bag support end member holes. firmly portion anchored and bag opened uppermost direct- is longitudinal the movement top plate ing an air blast across the pin. An mouth member and into the thereof. inserted, bagging filling ma- automati- then either 16. In a and article is cally manually, supplied the the mouth or chine air is wherein continuing plastic kept open uppermost pile the which is of a of flexible longitudi- bag pulled bags package then flexible is in a blast. away bag nally parallel bags, comprising to and direction each a said thereby bag blast, contiguous the from air when the is walls along perforated condition, and re- one said ex- walls lines folded moving pin. tending beyond a filled from to form other having spaced lip, lip pair heat closed and sealed. said a bags therethrough, openings be- said ap appealed an All the claims define ing openings positioned with said filling bags, paratus opening for and extending alignment, pin means closing provision no or there for openings and slidable said sealing 1 once filled. Claims thereto, hav- said relative means pin. require depending 3 and but yield- ing ends, upper lower means and Remaining patterned claims 11-18 are bags up- ingly urging package of said patent2 a to one claims in after certain wardly, improvement comprising Jr., Altman, Altman, hereafter stops machine mounted on said means on Office relied the Patent package which the rejection. support of the urged upwardly, stop hav- said means 1 and 16 Claims read: ing engaging lo- and thereof for 1. An use cating upper ends of said ing filling bags having type and means. beyond extending a a mouth and rejected" the claims re- The examiner comprising mouth, said maining appeal unpatentable over: source, an air means for direct- blast ing air from air source into said 23, 2,673,016 1954 March Gerbe the mouth 3, 1,794,517 March 1931 open, and hold the same said air direct- 991,245 May 2, 1911 Rhoades including means member bagging adapted bags, and flaps discloses a to overlie bags, employing an extending general- support and a stack, bag support ly and for blast and enclosure direction of air underlying plate member, having an blast source. an end said and aligned cooperation positioned stack is member there- engage temporarily the three closed with to hold enclosure around during opening having clamp member thereof said at depending pin passage If have least one through bag flaps extending flaps, sup- said the bottom may bag, operator port free 3,044,233, July 17, subsequently According presented 2. No. 1962. claims 17 solicitor, correspond in turn to 18 were said 13, initially presented, respec- As to his own claims correspond tively, except calling 11—16 claims were said to stack of 1, 2, “assembly” 10, than Altman’s claims rather 16, respectively. Appellant’s “package.” 15 and manually employed or this be done means to hold a stack arrangement bags. automatically Appellant employs a cam extending pins cooperating pass through openings metal tab or bags. finger. In case the bottom stack of either Such are not Alternatively, clamped fast. disclosed in Gerbe. relies on be cut action and a surface of member for *3 holding bags slightly form of in the a curve the in The Ex- tongue, conforming top plate, or to the aminer that held in of Heilman view it,” patentable or least suffi- and in order “to free at it would not Rhoades be support ciently modify apparatus and so that the the Gerbe to em- clamp only ploy pins of the a minimal of the character claimed. of and all the bottom opinion It is our that the disclosure bag open edge. its at patent showing in the to Heilman the apparatus for fill- pin holding bags posi- discloses an Heilman use of a in rings ing. bags piston envelopes being or tion while the outermost by opened by means of an sufficiently them after first air (The here referred apparatus air blast. numbers related as Gerbe’s quoted appear opinion suggest as desirability using pins in the board’s the bags vertically infra.) maintaining bags on a po- The held in the Gerbe 16, slightly hori- relationship rod inclined from the sition. In Heilman the passes through zontal, a hole in which between the the member urged in a re- terminates the 20 which is toward the opposing equivalent functionally cessed of an mem- member 5 is by grav- relationship ber 5. A follower 20 slides to the between urging ity rod, pins, inclined the support. down the the While opposing plate 5, thereby pro- patent toward the to Rhoades does not disclose ducing blast, action. near- the use of an air it does disclose opened by opposing plate clamping pin est 5 is use of a for maintain- ing jet ring piston drops position after which a in uppermost bag being while above, free from ed opinion removed. We are of the ripping flap, rod caus- patents to Heilman hopper. to fall into a Rhoades would render to one obvious bag is then sealed. skilled in the art a modification of the Rhoades discloses an sus- pins wherein would pending paper in a ver- provided passing through openings position, employing piercing point tical bag flaps in the claimed manner pierces by appellant. they approach some of the as position they from which are removed. agree analysis. with that We urges springloaded A Moreover, prin case, view this as we piercing point stop. back cipal is claimed difference with a curved constructed art resides the “at least front so that depending pin” of claims 1 and 3 and point only pierces one side of the at “pin means” described in the oth claims, appar er so which are worded ently require least as the The board said: two holes have all which patent bag- to Gerbe discloses a “pin means” extend. ging same general very character as that disclosed Heilman is in the art and same “pin means,” notwithstanding The essential issue with re- the fact spect patentability resides in a con- he calls it “rod.” It extends aligned sideration difference holes to hold appellant opens his make the air blast which Thus does
them merely individually they may applying claimed them so that knowledge clearly filled, bags being present torn off requires presume just appellant’s, art. as are when filled. We Section 103 us knowledge patentable distinction between full inventor see pin, rod a mere choice field his endeavor. properly “hindsight terminology. Appellant We see no could reconstruction” here,, pins application Nor do but selection and have called his short rods. anything using two, very pertinent we see unobvious in the examiner art. That desired, duty. if his instead of one. Heilman “aligned” bags by hanging his them The decision the board is affirmed. appel- hole. The one centered Affirmed. machine and lant’s *4 very perform same function— holding during WORLEY, J., blast—almost C. in the concurs result. very way. same Further, nothing important we see Judge (dissenting). SMITH, change the position a to from vertical a horizontal statutory lan- phrased in the The issue bags. change The re- dif- guage is whether the of section 103 quires only adapta- obvious mechanical claimed between the ferences substituting spring such tions as a to in- that the art such are push up weight instead of a to slide down. obvi- been would have as a whole vention bag- ordinary skill in ous to one ging presents Appellant the usual ar filling the time art at machine hindsight gument reconstruction appellant’s invention. employed been the examiner principal is Gerbe which reference disagree The board. We with filling bagging machine a discloses employing way proper apply the We think the enclosure, bags, an a stack this is to test to a case like obviousness underlying bag support mem- a a ber, working picture first the inventor The blast source. and an air shop art references— his with the roughly positioned in Gerbe hanging presumed to which he is know— and two closed end around the enclosure him. then notes walls around One bags. sup- of the stack of applicant here built Winslow that what clamp port member basically a holder he is Gerbe admits bags. open end disclos- bag opening to which he air-blast to facilitate es three alternatives bag retaining pins. If has added two flap bags. there extend- Where holding any problem in there were open at the from the bottom surface when may bag, operator free end flaps gripped used, their were manually top or this surface top pressure spring arrangement automatically by plates, would have said a cam Winslow done bottom himself, can do to hold cooperating extending “Now I a metal tab or securely?” Looking around more them finger. Alternately, surface walls, see Heilman’s en he would slightly be cut hung velopes their holes in with form of a so that the curve say himself, on rod. He would clamps only a minimal of my punch holes in I can “Ha! surface and all of the bottom (pin) put little rod holes. edge. open at the them! After hold That will pull apparatus off the I’ll them does Heilman discloses an for fill- Scoring ing envelopes employing should make Heilman. an air blast. tearing envelopes vertically by easier.” are held passes in each then rod which hole located on the so as envelope flap. downwardly rod is inclined and extend therefrom. The along concept alignment, a follower descending slides the rod first disclosed appellant, urging envelopes present fashion in such a abutting causing combination. aspect, towards clamping To meet this required envelope re- what is incorporation action. The is the system, moved from the double rod converted to provide edge. points Only from the to the hole of location. after this further modification can the Rhoades discloses an boxing sides and system end of Gerbe holding posi- a stack of ain vertical Only discarded. when all this is done employing piercing point tion finally do we realize an similar pierces bag. that claimed spring urges A loaded member piercing point into stop. appellant and back What had discovered not oc- Gerbe, constructed with a curved curred to the most recent inventor front subject so that the matter closest to that here point pierces only the bottom surface of claimed. I assume that the Gerbe device operable. Appellant, however, points practical out several difficulties inherent arguments agree I con- appellant the Gerbe construction which cerning the deficiencies the proposes to eliminate. The end ref- references combinations *5 requires degree longitudinal erences. Gerbe does not teach the con- rigidity they lest tend aligning extending cept from the crumple up- it as the successive member which with permost bags are removed. Gerbe thus perforated holes and necessary found it to bow the stack of Appellant’s apparatus is sections. clear- bags by providing special edge supports ly simplified improvement over the rigidity. Also, to assure such apparatus. any not help seen to retaining be of bag. an inflated Since the frictional hold Similarly, not disclose Rhoades does tongue exerted of the alignment means and is no more than great, may yield it sliding well ato hanging simple a number wall device might force such be exerted within convenient reach. operator’s repetitive thumb on a basis. by combining the action held Thus, justified concern is the air point It and friction. could blow the it before not be further. need considered Also, could be filled. in Gerbe the determining only. is held problem friction lies taught clamping Gerbe in success view Heilman action re- ordinary quires skill without benefit that each assert a frictional acquired knowledge after teaching. bag yet force the next apparent that It is the rod- bag easily up- must be removed without requires follower combination of Heilman setting action. The removal gravity operate force and will well cause several not work in a horizontal Fur- upsetting clamp- to follow thus ther, taught without the reconstruction ing action. by appellant the combination of Gerbe per say cooperating se would be non- To that a aligning required that, bag functional. What holes extension is taught only appellant, concept eliminating the answer to obvious Gerbe, is, think, of Heilman it be extracted drawbacks in I un- incorporated Further, simplification into Gerbe. warranted which results hindsight reasoning. the rod must be made into a A com- clearly of Heilman and respective and those lant’s device parison devices appel- Gerbe. differences between indicates *6 problem as I see it is that complicated the sim- not have a structure from plicity appellant’s device has obscured which he create limitations for his appellant’s the unobvious merits im- distinguish claims in an effort to over provement over art devices. It is prior Rather, art devices. his claims apparent drawings above distinguish over the art the ab- clearly distinguishes device complicated structure; sence his claim- apparatus. itself from the All simplicity ed invention is itself in the art spring board, he has is a filling thermoplastic bags. air funnel. The appealed claims to this structure are di- I would reverse the decision of the uncomplicated. Appellant rect and does board.